So being in the medical profession, i try to make things simple for my patients. I try to speak in layman's terms so my patients can understand me. Having not too much between the 2 ears, i try to keep things simple for myself too. Biochemistry, way beyond me. I thought to myself how would a good GM draft players without embarrasing himself? I looked through the combines results in the past 4 years to see if any patterns produce NFL stars. Nothing came up. The combines are useless. Vernon Gholston ripped up the combines in 2008 and is no where to be heard of. He came from a solid program at OSU. Drew Stanton did well in 3-cone drill in 2007. I figured out it's not about how fast you run or how strong you are, you got to have decent physical tools but you got to know how to play the game well. It's about skill level, heart, hard work, and character.

How does a GM determine how a person plays the game well? They can watch him. They can have their scouts watch him. They can interview their coaches. They can look at stats.

Me. Based upon what i saw of college football, the SEC and the PAC 10 are the two best conferences. I would draft based on need, BPA, and character. If i wasn't sure, i would just draft SEC and maybe PAC 10 all Americans based upon what need i have. Here are the SEC all Americans and PAC 10 all Americans of 2008. When they are voted on as the best and play against the highest level of competition in college football, then that says something about them. I still like to look at players from teams like San Jose State, Jarron Gilbert. I'm sure their are good talent in the Big 10 like Drew Brees and this year Shonn Greene. But there are players who are not good like Brain Hoyer, Todd Boeckman, and Troy Smith.

So to keep it simple, drafting all first team SEC and PAC 10 players are usually safe bets. Not that anyone of the these players can be bust, but Oher, Stafford, Andre Smith should be pretty solid pros from the level of competition they played in. It seems like the south like Florida and Texas are where all the big time football talents are. I use to live in Florida and remembered kids with their football uniforms on and helmets in their hands in the middle of an intersection watching your windshield for money. Why the west coast also produces good football talent may also be due to the better weather, where the players can practice year round. Also the SEC teams have less academic criteria for their footballs players. They are more willing to accept JUCO transfers than teams like high academic Universities like Michigan and Northwestern.

2008 ALL-SEC FOOTBALL TEAM
(*-Ties / #-Unanimous Selection) (Coaches could not vote for their own players)

Your drafting method is absurd. It hasn't been used since the 50's when pro teams didn't have scouting departments. The Rams were the 1st team to actually scout players and got 9 starters in their first draft. After that all the pro teams followed suit understanding that scouting is what is most important not which school you played for or which conference you played in. That's a fools way of drafting players.
Scouting starts with a skill set, then it investigates intangibles which are difficult to assess. The combine is absolutely crucial to the draft. It clearly defines who at least has the skill set to be a fuctioning pro. Then it is up to the talent level of a scout/GM to assess a player's intangibles and decide if he has what it takes to be successful at the next level.
Matt Millen is the perfect example of a GM who had no ability to assess talent and relied on which school a player played for or which conference he played in, and the results are clear to everybody. It doesn't work and never will.

each method is just as valid as the other. it's a huge debate right now between what a 40 time inside a track in no pads as a real measure of football talent. experiance and what conference a player is in makes a huge difference in the current scouting process. that is why d.r.c. from arizona and the joe flacco's of recent years get so much publicity. obviously skill set is a part of his method or else he wouldn't have taken the time to bolden some good picks. this is just another measure to filter out potential busts.

scouting/needs determined/evaluating where players fall/separating players of need-this is where this post is at. which is a very valid point-experience matters.

I combines are really good at determining one position i feel. running back. Chris johnson for example. Bob Sanders did well at safety position. I think the GMs look at the combines with a grain of salt. I think it's if you can play and not how fast you run. If a person run slightly slower but is more skilled....

each method is just as valid as the other. it's a huge debate right now between what a 40 time inside a track in no pads as a real measure of football talent. experience and what conference a player is in makes a huge difference in the current scouting process. that is why d.r.c. from arizona and the joe flacco's of recent years get so much publicity. obviously skill set is a part of his method or else he wouldn't have taken the time to bolden some good picks. this is just another measure to filter out potential busts.

scouting/needs determined/evaluating where players fall/separating players of need-this is where this post is at. which is a very valid point-experience matters.

There is no debate inside the NFL, they consider the combine to be essential. It is only a debate among posters who will never be scouts or GM's for professional teams. There is also no debate over whether or not scouting works and you can leave drafting up to the conferences a player plays in and whether he makes all conference or not. Not one pro team relies on this method. It may factor in because teams scout where certain HC's tend to place their better players but that is the end of it.
It is the same with 40 times. People here can argue over its merits but pro team's take it very seriously. Why, because every pro team know the parameters under which 95% of pro players fall, especially concerning speed. The draft is already a crapshoot but if you draft outside the parameters of 95% of pro players, you are asking for trouble. Is it the be all of tests at the combine, not at all, it is just one of many factors that go into scouting at the combine. They do other tests which the scouts view as very important. Team must also evaluate a person's makeup to determine if he has what it takes to make it in pro football, this is one area where poor GM's fail miserably.
The combine takes players away from their teams and conferences and ask players to prove on an equal footing that they deserve to be drafted. 'Show me the meat" is pretty well the mantra of the combine meaning show me your talent and prove to me you belong. If they do so they get drafted if they fail they drop significantly no matter what school they went to or what conference they played in. In fact once the Senior Bowl is started, what team you played for or what conference you played in ceases to have much meaning. How you perform on an equal basis against the other prospects who play your position is all that matters.

there are countless numbers of players who were skipped over in the draft and conversely countless more who have been flops overhyped from the combine. there is plenty of room for debate. wes welker, colston, chris henry, leaf, george, etc.

frankly i'm just not a fan of the way you respond to other people's posts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iamcanadian

Your drafting method is absurd... That's a fools way of drafting players.

there's a way to say things and a way not to. scout out which way you've been doing.

there are countless numbers of players who were skipped over in the draft and conversely countless more who have been flops overhyped from the combine. there is plenty of room for debate. wes welker, colston, chris henry, leaf, george, etc.

frankly i'm just not a fan of the way you respond to other people's posts.

there's a way to say things and a way not to. scout out which way you've been doing.

I may have been harsh on 5 fingers of death's ideas but they are way off the chart. Nobody is saying the combine is perfect but his claim that it is worthless and that teams need only to look at the conference a player plays in is really absurd in my opinion. The draft at its best is a crap shoot with some GM's very good at it and some very poor at it but even the best make mistakes. Judging player's desire to succeed is very tough to judge as is their mental toughness, nevertheless, the combine is an extremely useful tool in delineating prospects while relying on conference all star teams is a joke.
Sorry if I wasn't too kind in saying so.